By the same authors

From the same journal

From the same journal

Rights, responsibilities and NICE: a rejoinder to Harris

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Full text download(s)


Published copy (DOI)



Publication details

JournalJournal of Medical Ethics
DatePublished - 1 Aug 2007
Issue number8
Number of pages3
Pages (from-to)-
Original languageEnglish


Harris' reply to our defence of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence's (NICE) current cost-effectiveness procedures contains two further errors. First, he wrongly draws a conclusion from the fact that NICE does not and cannot evaluate all possible uses of healthcare resources at any one time and generally cannot know which National Health Service (NHS) activities would be displaced or which groups of patients would have to forgo health benefits: the inference is that no estimate is or can be made by NICE of the benefits to be forgone. This is a non-sequitur. Second, he asserts that it is a flaw at the heart of the use of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as an outcome measure that comparisons between people need to be made. Such comparisons do indeed have to be made, but this is not a consequence of the choice of any particular outcome measure, be it the QALY or anything else.

Bibliographical note

This is an author produced version of a paper published in Journal of Medical Ethics. Openly available from February 2008 in accordance with the publisher's embargo.

    Research areas

  • cost-effectiveness, Harris, NICE (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence), QALY

Discover related content

Find related publications, people, projects, datasets and more using interactive charts.

View graph of relations